Considering that our generation is more concerned with the state of the environment than any previous generation has been, it is natural that all sorts of organizations are paying more attention to their "green" reputation among their new target demographic: us. An unfortunate consequence of this trend, however, is that organizations easily lose sight of what makes them truly sustainable.
The Princeton Review's new "Green Rating" system in this year's Guide to Colleges is just one of a number of initiatives that impede the public's understanding of the meaning of sustainability. The American College and University Presidents Climate Commitment is another.
It can be a good thing when powerful organizations, like universities, are held accountable for their civic participation (environmental or otherwise) by the populations that support them. Undoubtedly, the American College and University Presidents Climate Commitment, which, in the last two years, has gained the signature of 550 schools pledging to meet a set of environmental qualifications, does its part to ensure that institutions of higher learning are thinking about improving their energy use. That said, the Climate Commitment biases the public's view against the environmental practices of institutions (like Dartmouth) that do not sign.
Both The Dartmouth ("College uses innovative energy plan," August 5) and The New York Times ("Green, Greener, Greenest," July 27) explained the rationale behind Dartmouth's refusal to sign the commitment. The College's assistant provost, Mary Gorman, pointed out that spending our endowment to keep tuition costs as low as possible is more meaningful than purchasing carbon offsets to compensate for the astronomical expense of making our buildings carbon-neutral.
I looked at the Climate Commitment's web site and found that the stipulations of the pledge only strengthen Gorman's point. The requirements for signatories are lofty, even for the smallest colleges; I'm sure that addressing them at Dartmouth would require the creation of a new office -- which in turn would require space, salaries and a substantial transition period.
On the other hand, several of the requirements are easier to fulfill: "encourage use of and provide access to transportation for all faculty, staff, students and visitors" and "adopt three or more associated measures to reduce waste." Maybe I'm too idealistic, but I don't think schools should be patted on the back for initiatives like this -- colleges have no excuse for failing to look into such wonderfully simple ways of being green.
Sustainability, in this regard, is truly a local phenomenon -- or, to go even further, an individual phenomenon. Being environmentally conscious is all about changing one's habits to reduce one's imprint on the environment. (At the very least, I now feel guilty about throwing away my cup every time I buy coffee).
According to Gorman, the College is indeed devising its own plans to reduce its carbon emissions, but the nature of the College's individual efforts makes it harder to draw meaningful comparisons between our efforts and those of other schools and organizations.
It seems cheap, therefore, to reduce the role of higher education in environmental consciousness and innovation to a name on a pledge or a ranking in a (recycled paper?) book. Where does the locally grown produce from the Collis salad bar (from Edgewater Farm in Plainfield, N.H., Dartmouth's Organic Farm and Sam Mazza's Farm in Colchester, Vt.) fit into a bureaucratic Climate Commitment?
The role of the local Swiss chard, green kale and cherry tomatoes is the key to understanding Dartmouth's sustainability efforts. Serving Vermont produce in the dining hall is a feasible initiative for Dartmouth, where replacing every building that emits carbon dioxide is too expensive. That is not to say that Dartmouth should stop thinking of ways to reduce its carbon emissions, but what about considering the carbon dioxide that we did not emit when we transported vegetables only a few miles as part of our own personal climate commitment?
As Dartmouth students, most of us would be proud to have our institution's name on a Climate Commitment, but most of us are proud enough of our school's efforts already. And, if we are not proud, then we are getting our hands dirty and doing something about it -- with the financial and advisory support of an administration that values our experiences here more than Dartmouth's reputation as sustainable. Regardless of how others say we stack up against other schools, we must continually discuss our own (ever-rising) environmental accountability standards as individuals and as members of this community.
